User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
USA
|
Posted: 2/25/2019 10:32:24 PM EST
[#1]
This is Teotihuacan in the early 1900s:
Regarding Graham Hancock and his videos about the maps. I was drunk last night when I started watching it and didn't finish, but it managed to strike a chord with me as I watched a movie called "Longitude" a couple years ago that highlighted the significance of timekeeping. It also, being a British movie, posed King George III in a completely different light than our own history and that, in itself, I found entertaining (probably didn't hurt that I suspect the French took good care of Ben Franklin as well). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--b0eaKGWwE Preview of Longitude instead of the full movie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlQcCenLchU |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 3:22:44 AM EST
[#2]
365x20=7300
daysxyears 7300/2500000=432 days/blocks 432/24=18 blocksperday/hours per day 18 blocks per hour. cut moved and fitted It didn't happen. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 6:27:16 AM EST
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By waterglass:
365x20=7300 daysxyears 7300/2500000=432 days/blocks 432/24=18 blocksperday/hours per day 18 blocks per hour. cut moved and fitted It didn't happen. So, it's 36 to 43 blocks per hour. The 20,000 workers camp they found does not match the numbers required to do it, unless they used some other method than the mainstream folks have been speculating. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 7:38:26 AM EST
[Last Edit: waterglass]
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Rossi:
It's probably more than that. They unlikely worked at night. Therefore, imagine 12 hours or less shifts. One article suggests 10 hour shifts. So, it's 36 to 43 blocks per hour. The 20,000 workers camp they found does not match the numbers required to do it, unless they used some other method than the mainstream folks have been speculating. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Rossi:
Originally Posted By waterglass:
365x20=7300 daysxyears 7300/2500000=432 days/blocks 432/24=18 blocksperday/hours per day 18 blocks per hour. cut moved and fitted It didn't happen. So, it's 36 to 43 blocks per hour. The 20,000 workers camp they found does not match the numbers required to do it, unless they used some other method than the mainstream folks have been speculating. If Not? Then they didn't find a camp that housed 20,000 people for 20 years. 365daysx20years=7,300 Average daily BM 8oz x 20,000=10,000pounds of daily shit 7300x10,000= 73,000,000 lets say 150,000 pounds of wood makes 5,000 pounds of ash. 7300daysx5000pounds of ash=36,500,000 then there is the clay pots required for water and cooking. Lets say the average water pot carried 3 gallons and the average pot cooked 3 pounds of food. water pots weighed 3 pounds and there would have been atleast 10,000 in circulation, along with similar number of cook pots of the same weight. 1 in one hundred were broken each day. so that is 600 pounds of broken pottery per day. 7300daysx600pounds of broken pottery 4,380,000. If they did not find 70 million pounds of human shit, 35 million pounds of wood ash and 4 million pounds of pot shards guess what else they didn't find? They didn't find a camp. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 8:24:01 AM EST
[Last Edit: waterglass]
[#5]
Smug Norman Normington: Ahh but waterglass, you simple fool! They threw the poop, ash and pots into the Nile!
Waterglass retorts sarcastically: Well in that case, since we require no evidence to prove things, after building them the aliens took off in their space ships. Angry Norman Normington: reeeeee Waterglass smiling, shakes head like the Jack Nicholson meme: Exactly Norm. Exactly. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 8:41:14 AM EST
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 6GUNZ:
I already did. The geology, which is a far more exact science than Egyptology, says the Sphinx and pyramid enclosures are much older. And again, the chemical residues in the various chambers suggest it was being used to generate power. And again, just because it might have been used as a tomb at some point, even from day one, doesn't mean it didn't have multiple purposes, or that it was built by Khufu. And "deviating from the mainstream" doesn't place a higher burden of proof on someone. That is some faulty logic you've created all on your own. History has proven the majority opinion is usually wrong. You can't define reality by democratic vote. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 6GUNZ:
Originally Posted By TxRabbitBane: You’re the one deviating from the mainstream. So, start justifying your claim. If you want to be convincing, that’s how you do it. That’s exactly how it works. So far I’ve only seen one vaguely convincing “it’s not a tomb” argument, and it hasn’t even been mentioned here. Also, if it isn’t a tomb, what is it? How about the >100 other pyramids? And again, just because it might have been used as a tomb at some point, even from day one, doesn't mean it didn't have multiple purposes, or that it was built by Khufu. And "deviating from the mainstream" doesn't place a higher burden of proof on someone. That is some faulty logic you've created all on your own. History has proven the majority opinion is usually wrong. You can't define reality by democratic vote. Generate power? For what? Using what mechanism (there is none, nor has there ever been evidence of such)? Conclusion: total fabrication. Why do bronze agers (or even more primitive folks) need a power plant? For their spaceships? The (debunked) “light bulbs”? Again, what chemicals, in what concentrations,, measured by whom? So far we have a plausible explanation (tomb/Khufu) and an outrageous one (antediluvian power plant with no power generating stuff, or whatever) with zero supporting evidence. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 8:51:12 AM EST
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TxRabbitBane:
No, that’s the way argument works... burden of proof on the outrageous claim. That’s you. So far there is still zero evidence presented that the GP wasn’t built by Khufu, and the Sphinx by khafre. So at this point, it’s just a story... may as well be Stargate. Generate power? For what? Using what mechanism (there is none, nor has there ever been evidence of such)? Conclusion: total fabrication. Why do bronze agers (or even more primitive folks) need a power plant? For their spaceships? The (debunked) “light bulbs”? Again, what chemicals, in what concentrations,, measured by whom? So far we have a plausible explanation (tomb/Khufu) and an outrageous one (antediluvian power plant with no power generating stuff, or whatever) with zero supporting evidence. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TxRabbitBane:
Originally Posted By 6GUNZ:
Originally Posted By TxRabbitBane: You’re the one deviating from the mainstream. So, start justifying your claim. If you want to be convincing, that’s how you do it. That’s exactly how it works. So far I’ve only seen one vaguely convincing “it’s not a tomb” argument, and it hasn’t even been mentioned here. Also, if it isn’t a tomb, what is it? How about the >100 other pyramids? And again, just because it might have been used as a tomb at some point, even from day one, doesn't mean it didn't have multiple purposes, or that it was built by Khufu. And "deviating from the mainstream" doesn't place a higher burden of proof on someone. That is some faulty logic you've created all on your own. History has proven the majority opinion is usually wrong. You can't define reality by democratic vote. Generate power? For what? Using what mechanism (there is none, nor has there ever been evidence of such)? Conclusion: total fabrication. Why do bronze agers (or even more primitive folks) need a power plant? For their spaceships? The (debunked) “light bulbs”? Again, what chemicals, in what concentrations,, measured by whom? So far we have a plausible explanation (tomb/Khufu) and an outrageous one (antediluvian power plant with no power generating stuff, or whatever) with zero supporting evidence. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 9:21:40 AM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By waterglass:
Smug Norman Normington: Ahh but waterglass, you simple fool! They threw the poop, ash and pots into the Nile! Waterglass retorts sarcastically: Well in that case, since we require no evidence to prove things, after building them the aliens took off in their space ships. Angry Norman Normington: reeeeee Waterglass smiling, shakes head like the Jack Nicholson meme: Exactly Norm. Exactly. 
Cannot go against that argument. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 9:54:09 AM EST
[Last Edit: Balista]
[#9]
I don't know if this was covered already but Stonehenge in the UK was recreated by archeologists in the 1950's.
You are seeing a modern re-imagining of what they think it looked like. To me this like a Paul Bunyon roadside tourist trap. from 1901 to 1964, the majority of the stone circle was restored in a series of makeovers which have left it, in the words of one archaeologist, as ‘a product of the 20th-century heritage industry’. 
Notice the concrete? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 12:39:14 PM EST
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TxRabbitBane: No, that’s the way argument works... burden of proof on the outrageous claim. That’s you. So far there is still zero evidence presented that the GP wasn’t built by Khufu, and the Sphinx by khafre. So at this point, it’s just a story... may as well be Stargate. Generate power? For what? Using what mechanism (there is none, nor has there ever been evidence of such)? Conclusion: total fabrication. Why do bronze agers (or even more primitive folks) need a power plant? For their spaceships? The (debunked) “light bulbs”? Again, what chemicals, in what concentrations,, measured by whom? So far we have a plausible explanation (tomb/Khufu) and an outrageous one (antediluvian power plant with no power generating stuff, or whatever) with zero supporting evidence. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 12:46:42 PM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By a555:
Did we lose @headstoner ? No, I just dont know as much about Egypt or incas or pyramids as some people seem to so I stay out of a lot of the conversation. I just know how to cut rocks. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 12:52:37 PM EST
[Last Edit: TxRabbitBane]
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 6GUNZ:
You've obviously made up your mind, and your worldview obviously hinges on the current paradigm being correct. Every generation believes they got it right this time. Yea, sure, those people before us thought the earth was flat and the center of the universe, but WE finally got everything right and now know everything there is to know. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 6GUNZ:
Originally Posted By TxRabbitBane: No, that’s the way argument works... burden of proof on the outrageous claim. That’s you. So far there is still zero evidence presented that the GP wasn’t built by Khufu, and the Sphinx by khafre. So at this point, it’s just a story... may as well be Stargate. Generate power? For what? Using what mechanism (there is none, nor has there ever been evidence of such)? Conclusion: total fabrication. Why do bronze agers (or even more primitive folks) need a power plant? For their spaceships? The (debunked) “light bulbs”? Again, what chemicals, in what concentrations,, measured by whom? So far we have a plausible explanation (tomb/Khufu) and an outrageous one (antediluvian power plant with no power generating stuff, or whatever) with zero supporting evidence. Very persuasive. Pro tip: smart people (and occasionally dumb folks like me) require evidence before we change our minds about something. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 12:53:19 PM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Balista:
I don't know if this was covered already but Stonehenge in the UK was recreated by archeologists in the 1950's. You are seeing a modern re-imagining of what they think it looked like. To me this like a Paul Bunyon roadside tourist trap. https://i.stack.imgur.com/8Jevv.jpg http://blog.english-heritage.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/al0921_063_01-Stone-57-being-re-erected-from-the-north-east-1958.jpg https://ashtronort.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/stonehenge-1958-repairs-0079.jpg?w=454&h=657 http://wafflesatnoon.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/stonehenge-splash.jpg https://www.ancient-code.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/stonehenge_14.jpg https://www.ancient-code.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/stonehenge_24.jpg https://www.ancient-code.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/stonehenge_32.jpg https://www.ancient-code.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/stonehenge_34.jpg Notice the concrete? https://www.themodernantiquarian.com/img_fullsize/66745.jpg 
It's basically just a larger version of the dolmen that you see all over Europe: 
They're about 3-5 thousand years old. Over the millennia, people dug into them to loot the burial treasures, after which people carried away the smaller stones to build houses. What's left are the dolmen, which is just the larger stones that were too heavy to carry away. They actually recently discovered that the stones at Stonehenge have carvings on them that are too weathered to see with the naked eye. So Stonehenge is actually extremely similar to the other large burial mounds in the same area. You can see the carvings in the photo above that were preserved since that particular mound was never looted. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 1:00:00 PM EST
[#14]
There is a lot of history that was buried and destroyed in the flood.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 1:13:18 PM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TxRabbitBane: This is your response instead of presenting any evidence to back your claims? Duly noted. Very persuasive. Pro tip: smart people (and occasionally dumb folks like me) require evidence before we change our minds about something. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 1:17:17 PM EST
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By headstoner:
@a555 No, I just dont know as much about Egypt or incas or pyramids as some people seem to so I stay out of a lot of the conversation. I just know how to cut rocks. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By headstoner:
Originally Posted By a555:
Did we lose @headstoner ? No, I just dont know as much about Egypt or incas or pyramids as some people seem to so I stay out of a lot of the conversation. I just know how to cut rocks. Mainstream archaeologists say they built the whole Great Pyramid in max 20 years dragging very large granite (up to 80 tons each) boulders from over 550 miles and smaller limestone ones (up to 15 tons) from quarries nearby (approx. 20 miles) and using around 20,000 people, with some saying it was no more than 6 or 7,000. There's one account from Herodotus (a Greek visiting them at the time) who mentioned 100,000 but the mainstream archaeologists dismiss this number saying it was just "hearsay". The numbers do not seem to match when we see much better documented numbers from China saying they used something between 500,000 to 1,500,000 people to build one section of their wall over 20 years. The Chinese did not use massive boulders. Instead, they used bricks and much smaller rocks. The numbers seem quite off, don't you think? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 1:38:52 PM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 6GUNZ:
You've obviously made up your mind, and your worldview obviously hinges on the current paradigm being correct. Every generation believes they got it right this time. Yea, sure, those people before us thought the earth was flat and the center of the universe, but WE finally got everything right and now know everything there is to know. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 6GUNZ:
Originally Posted By TxRabbitBane: No, that’s the way argument works... burden of proof on the outrageous claim. That’s you. So far there is still zero evidence presented that the GP wasn’t built by Khufu, and the Sphinx by khafre. So at this point, it’s just a story... may as well be Stargate. Generate power? For what? Using what mechanism (there is none, nor has there ever been evidence of such)? Conclusion: total fabrication. Why do bronze agers (or even more primitive folks) need a power plant? For their spaceships? The (debunked) “light bulbs”? Again, what chemicals, in what concentrations,, measured by whom? So far we have a plausible explanation (tomb/Khufu) and an outrageous one (antediluvian power plant with no power generating stuff, or whatever) with zero supporting evidence. Anyone with a moderate education since the Ptolemy, in the 3rd Century B.C.E, was taught that Earth is sphere. As that properly explained the horizon, the difference in shadows between geographically separated locations and astronomical observations. With the apparent lack of an ability to fact check a blatant falsehood that is less then 300 years old, from a time period that we have extensive writings from; why should anyone here believe you have sussed out anything true, from a time period when the best evidence is literally fragments in a language sans context, that hasn't been spoken in thousands of years? 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 2:36:34 PM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Rossi:
Wow! I did nto know that. So, they rebuilt the monument the way they "believed" it was? Not much different than those "restaurateurs" that paint some stuff over an original relic using their own views. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Rossi:
Originally Posted By Balista:
I don't know if this was covered already but Stonehenge in the UK was recreated by archeologists in the 1950's. You are seeing a modern re-imagining of what they think it looked like. To me this like a Paul Bunyon roadside tourist trap. from 1901 to 1964, the majority of the stone circle was restored in a series of makeovers which have left it, in the words of one archaeologist, as ‘a product of the 20th-century heritage industry’. http://blog.english-heritage.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/al0921_063_01-Stone-57-being-re-erected-from-the-north-east-1958.jpg https://ashtronort.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/stonehenge-1958-repairs-0079.jpg?w=454&h=657 http://wafflesatnoon.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/stonehenge-splash.jpg https://www.ancient-code.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/stonehenge_14.jpg https://www.ancient-code.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/stonehenge_24.jpg https://www.ancient-code.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/stonehenge_32.jpg https://www.ancient-code.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/stonehenge_34.jpg Notice the concrete? https://www.themodernantiquarian.com/img_fullsize/66745.jpg Not much different than those "restaurateurs" that paint some stuff over an original relic using their own views. Looking at this thread, looks like a pretty common thing.... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 3:42:52 PM EST
[Last Edit: waterglass]
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 6GUNZ:
I've already given you a rundown of everything twice. I'm tired of repeating myself. If you google any of what I've told you there is a massive amount of information. A lot of it has already been posted by myself and others in this thread. Anything more would just be redundant at this point. There are numerous videos on youtube explaining the pyramids as a power generator theory that go into great detail about the chemicals found in the shafts and how they might have been used. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 6GUNZ:
Originally Posted By TxRabbitBane: This is your response instead of presenting any evidence to back your claims? Duly noted. Very persuasive. Pro tip: smart people (and occasionally dumb folks like me) require evidence before we change our minds about something. like others, I wanna keep this thread going, so post em if you got em. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 3:50:34 PM EST
[Last Edit: waterglass]
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By exDefensorMilitas:
The mistaken belief that people of ancient times thought the Earth was flat was started by Washington Irvin in his fancifully stylized story about Christopher Columbus. This story was mistakenly thought of as a serious work by some British and French scholars, and later pushed by Protestants and Atheists as a means to discredit the Catholic Church regarding science, in the 1800's. Anyone with a moderate education since the Ptolemy, in the 3rd Century B.C.E, was taught that Earth is sphere. As that properly explained the horizon, the difference in shadows between geographically separated locations and astronomical observations. With the apparent lack of an ability to fact check a blatant falsehood that is less then 300 years old, from a time period that we have extensive writings from; why should anyone here believe you have sussed out anything true, from a time period when the best evidence is literally fragments in a language sans context, that hasn't been spoken in thousands of years? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By exDefensorMilitas:
Originally Posted By 6GUNZ:
Originally Posted By TxRabbitBane: No, that’s the way argument works... burden of proof on the outrageous claim. That’s you. So far there is still zero evidence presented that the GP wasn’t built by Khufu, and the Sphinx by khafre. So at this point, it’s just a story... may as well be Stargate. Generate power? For what? Using what mechanism (there is none, nor has there ever been evidence of such)? Conclusion: total fabrication. Why do bronze agers (or even more primitive folks) need a power plant? For their spaceships? The (debunked) “light bulbs”? Again, what chemicals, in what concentrations,, measured by whom? So far we have a plausible explanation (tomb/Khufu) and an outrageous one (antediluvian power plant with no power generating stuff, or whatever) with zero supporting evidence. Anyone with a moderate education since the Ptolemy, in the 3rd Century B.C.E, was taught that Earth is sphere. As that properly explained the horizon, the difference in shadows between geographically separated locations and astronomical observations. With the apparent lack of an ability to fact check a blatant falsehood that is less then 300 years old, from a time period that we have extensive writings from; why should anyone here believe you have sussed out anything true, from a time period when the best evidence is literally fragments in a language sans context, that hasn't been spoken in thousands of years? Chuckles in Damn it Norman. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 4:20:22 PM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By waterglass:
That would probably require 40,000 gallons a clean water and 20,000-30,000 pounds of food per day. 150,000 pounds of fire wood per day. There should be a corresponding amount of shit somewhere. did they dig up 70 million pounds of fossilized turds? 10 million pounds of wood ash? millions of pounds of hand made pot fragments? If Not? Then they didn't find a camp that housed 20,000 people for 20 years. 365daysx20years=7,300 Average daily BM 8oz x 20,000=10,000pounds of daily shit 7300x10,000= 73,000,000 lets say 150,000 pounds of wood makes 5,000 pounds of ash. 7300daysx5000pounds of ash=36,500,000 then there is the clay pots required for water and cooking. Lets say the average water pot carried 3 gallons and the average pot cooked 3 pounds of food. water pots weighed 3 pounds and there would have been atleast 10,000 in circulation, along with similar number of cook pots of the same weight. 1 in one hundred were broken each day. so that is 600 pounds of broken pottery per day. 7300daysx600pounds of broken pottery 4,380,000. If they did not find 70 million pounds of human shit, 35 million pounds of wood ash and 4 million pounds of pot shards guess what else they didn't find? They didn't find a camp. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 4:22:53 PM EST
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Rossi: What are your thoughts about the processes and efficiency they "supposedly" used? My question is about the numbers and time. Mainstream archaeologists say they built the whole Great Pyramid in max 20 years dragging very large granite (up to 80 tons each) boulders from over 550 miles and smaller limestone ones (up to 15 tons) from quarries nearby (approx. 20 miles) and using around 20,000 people, with some saying it was no more than 6 or 7,000. There's one account from Herodotus (a Greek visiting them at the time) who mentioned 100,000 but the mainstream archaeologists dismiss this number saying it was just "hearsay". The numbers do not seem to match when we see much better documented numbers from China saying they used something between 500,000 to 1,500,000 people to build one section of their wall over 20 years. The Chinese did not use massive boulders. Instead, they used bricks and much smaller rocks. The numbers seem quite off, don't you think? I bet they were very proficient in their skills. 20 years sounds like a very long time to me. The biger arguments in my mind would be workforce, actual methods and techniques, and of course reason. For all I know they could have gotten one stone per day cut, delivered and placed; and for all I know they could have been doing that in a assembly line configuration spanning from quarry to placement...500+miles of huge stones with people to keep the chain moving at a pace of quarry to placement per day= how ever many stones were in that line from quarry to placement per day were getting the job done. I bet they weren't union workers. The stones I work with are typically 2000lbs or under, (some exceptions of course) with just me working and having the stones finished I could load and deliver 10-20 a day depending on distance( I'm imagining under 20 miles). With factory level equipment It wouldn't be unreasonable to cut and polish 10-20 a day. With a bunch of people a bunch of work could get done fairly quickly. I havent really tried to understand the sheer magnitude of the great pyramids, as far as number of stones, size and that sort of thing but I know I can do what I consider a lot of work in a reasonable amount of time without trying to set speed records. Its all different depending on what it is im doing, cutting I can do fast, polishing I could do a lot faster but I'm not a factory/ production type business, I just do it just because I can. It is a lot faster to order a stone from a large facility, but they have them ready to go, I can in theory cut, polish and engrave a stone from a single boulder in a few days if I wanted to work hard....but I dont like working hard. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 4:50:37 PM EST
[#24]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By headstoner:
Well when I read that the Egyptians were around for 3000+ years I have to think they must have learned something. We have only been doing slightly more than clacking rocks together for far less than 1000 years with most major leaps in tech occuring just recently. I bet they were very proficient in their skills. 20 years sounds like a very long time to me. The biger arguments in my mind would be workforce, actual methods and techniques, and of course reason. For all I know they could have gotten one stone per day cut, delivered and placed; and for all I know they could have been doing that in a assembly line configuration spanning from quarry to placement...500+miles of huge stones with people to keep the chain moving at a pace of quarry to placement per day= how ever many stones were in that line from quarry to placement per day were getting the job done. I bet they weren't union workers. The stones I work with are typically 2000lbs or under, (some exceptions of course) with just me working and having the stones finished I could load and deliver 10-20 a day depending on distance( I'm imagining under 20 miles). With factory level equipment It wouldn't be unreasonable to cut and polish 10-20 a day. With a bunch of people a bunch of work could get done fairly quickly. I havent really tried to understand the sheer magnitude of the great pyramids, as far as number of stones, size and that sort of thing but I know I can do what I consider a lot of work in a reasonable amount of time without trying to set speed records. Its all different depending on what it is im doing, cutting I can do fast, polishing I could do a lot faster but I'm not a factory/ production type business, I just do it just because I can. It is a lot faster to order a stone from a large facility, but they have them ready to go, I can in theory cut, polish and engrave a stone from a single boulder in a few days if I wanted to work hard....but I dont like working hard. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By headstoner:
Originally Posted By Rossi: What are your thoughts about the processes and efficiency they "supposedly" used? My question is about the numbers and time. Mainstream archaeologists say they built the whole Great Pyramid in max 20 years dragging very large granite (up to 80 tons each) boulders from over 550 miles and smaller limestone ones (up to 15 tons) from quarries nearby (approx. 20 miles) and using around 20,000 people, with some saying it was no more than 6 or 7,000. There's one account from Herodotus (a Greek visiting them at the time) who mentioned 100,000 but the mainstream archaeologists dismiss this number saying it was just "hearsay". The numbers do not seem to match when we see much better documented numbers from China saying they used something between 500,000 to 1,500,000 people to build one section of their wall over 20 years. The Chinese did not use massive boulders. Instead, they used bricks and much smaller rocks. The numbers seem quite off, don't you think? I bet they were very proficient in their skills. 20 years sounds like a very long time to me. The biger arguments in my mind would be workforce, actual methods and techniques, and of course reason. For all I know they could have gotten one stone per day cut, delivered and placed; and for all I know they could have been doing that in a assembly line configuration spanning from quarry to placement...500+miles of huge stones with people to keep the chain moving at a pace of quarry to placement per day= how ever many stones were in that line from quarry to placement per day were getting the job done. I bet they weren't union workers. The stones I work with are typically 2000lbs or under, (some exceptions of course) with just me working and having the stones finished I could load and deliver 10-20 a day depending on distance( I'm imagining under 20 miles). With factory level equipment It wouldn't be unreasonable to cut and polish 10-20 a day. With a bunch of people a bunch of work could get done fairly quickly. I havent really tried to understand the sheer magnitude of the great pyramids, as far as number of stones, size and that sort of thing but I know I can do what I consider a lot of work in a reasonable amount of time without trying to set speed records. Its all different depending on what it is im doing, cutting I can do fast, polishing I could do a lot faster but I'm not a factory/ production type business, I just do it just because I can. It is a lot faster to order a stone from a large facility, but they have them ready to go, I can in theory cut, polish and engrave a stone from a single boulder in a few days if I wanted to work hard....but I dont like working hard. Tons of "redneck stuff" was a common, every day thing, which is now lost to history. Today, if you give somebody a roll each of duct tape and bailing wire, they have no clue how to make anything except some artsy idea from Pinterest. If something useful is heard from a gandparent, they put a video calling it a "Life Hack". Like many other feats of Redneck Engineering, it's only documented verbally and by showing other people how to do it. Therefore, while governments and business and neighboring tribes were well documented, the technologies they used everyday may as well have been alien, as "It's just common sense, not going to waste half a dozen scribes to write common sense on these stones!" It is alien to us, not LGM, but in the "strange, foreign" sense of usage. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 4:59:40 PM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By headstoner:
Well when I read that the Egyptians were around for 3000+ years I have to think they must have learned something. We have only been doing slightly more than clacking rocks together for far less than 1000 years with most major leaps in tech occuring just recently. I bet they were very proficient in their skills. 20 years sounds like a very long time to me. The biger arguments in my mind would be workforce, actual methods and techniques, and of course reason. For all I know they could have gotten one stone per day cut, delivered and placed; and for all I know they could have been doing that in a assembly line configuration spanning from quarry to placement...500+miles of huge stones with people to keep the chain moving at a pace of quarry to placement per day= how ever many stones were in that line from quarry to placement per day were getting the job done. I bet they weren't union workers. The stones I work with are typically 2000lbs or under, (some exceptions of course) with just me working and having the stones finished I could load and deliver 10-20 a day depending on distance( I'm imagining under 20 miles). With factory level equipment It wouldn't be unreasonable to cut and polish 10-20 a day. With a bunch of people a bunch of work could get done fairly quickly. I havent really tried to understand the sheer magnitude of the great pyramids, as far as number of stones, size and that sort of thing but I know I can do what I consider a lot of work in a reasonable amount of time without trying to set speed records. Its all different depending on what it is im doing, cutting I can do fast, polishing I could do a lot faster but I'm not a factory/ production type business, I just do it just because I can. It is a lot faster to order a stone from a large facility, but they have them ready to go, I can in theory cut, polish and engrave a stone from a single boulder in a few days if I wanted to work hard....but I dont like working hard. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By headstoner:
Originally Posted By Rossi: What are your thoughts about the processes and efficiency they "supposedly" used? My question is about the numbers and time. Mainstream archaeologists say they built the whole Great Pyramid in max 20 years dragging very large granite (up to 80 tons each) boulders from over 550 miles and smaller limestone ones (up to 15 tons) from quarries nearby (approx. 20 miles) and using around 20,000 people, with some saying it was no more than 6 or 7,000. There's one account from Herodotus (a Greek visiting them at the time) who mentioned 100,000 but the mainstream archaeologists dismiss this number saying it was just "hearsay". The numbers do not seem to match when we see much better documented numbers from China saying they used something between 500,000 to 1,500,000 people to build one section of their wall over 20 years. The Chinese did not use massive boulders. Instead, they used bricks and much smaller rocks. The numbers seem quite off, don't you think? I bet they were very proficient in their skills. 20 years sounds like a very long time to me. The biger arguments in my mind would be workforce, actual methods and techniques, and of course reason. For all I know they could have gotten one stone per day cut, delivered and placed; and for all I know they could have been doing that in a assembly line configuration spanning from quarry to placement...500+miles of huge stones with people to keep the chain moving at a pace of quarry to placement per day= how ever many stones were in that line from quarry to placement per day were getting the job done. I bet they weren't union workers. The stones I work with are typically 2000lbs or under, (some exceptions of course) with just me working and having the stones finished I could load and deliver 10-20 a day depending on distance( I'm imagining under 20 miles). With factory level equipment It wouldn't be unreasonable to cut and polish 10-20 a day. With a bunch of people a bunch of work could get done fairly quickly. I havent really tried to understand the sheer magnitude of the great pyramids, as far as number of stones, size and that sort of thing but I know I can do what I consider a lot of work in a reasonable amount of time without trying to set speed records. Its all different depending on what it is im doing, cutting I can do fast, polishing I could do a lot faster but I'm not a factory/ production type business, I just do it just because I can. It is a lot faster to order a stone from a large facility, but they have them ready to go, I can in theory cut, polish and engrave a stone from a single boulder in a few days if I wanted to work hard....but I dont like working hard. Annotated SVG of Pyramids and structures Mouse over names to get an idea of scale. Today, pretty easy and they're getting taller. however long ago? A few Wonders of the world. If we still had the Library at Alexandria, we'd know all this and more. we also could be stuck in the stone age due to resting on laurels, but we'd know how they were built.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 5:23:11 PM EST
[Last Edit: waterglass]
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Loremsk:
Small note: wood ash, broken pottery and even feces are useful resources in their own right and would be consumed in making other things. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Loremsk:
Originally Posted By waterglass:
That would probably require 40,000 gallons a clean water and 20,000-30,000 pounds of food per day. 150,000 pounds of fire wood per day. There should be a corresponding amount of shit somewhere. did they dig up 70 million pounds of fossilized turds? 10 million pounds of wood ash? millions of pounds of hand made pot fragments? If Not? Then they didn't find a camp that housed 20,000 people for 20 years. 365daysx20years=7,300 Average daily BM 8oz x 20,000=10,000pounds of daily shit 7300x10,000= 73,000,000 lets say 150,000 pounds of wood makes 5,000 pounds of ash. 7300daysx5000pounds of ash=36,500,000 then there is the clay pots required for water and cooking. Lets say the average water pot carried 3 gallons and the average pot cooked 3 pounds of food. water pots weighed 3 pounds and there would have been atleast 10,000 in circulation, along with similar number of cook pots of the same weight. 1 in one hundred were broken each day. so that is 600 pounds of broken pottery per day. 7300daysx600pounds of broken pottery 4,380,000. If they did not find 70 million pounds of human shit, 35 million pounds of wood ash and 4 million pounds of pot shards guess what else they didn't find? They didn't find a camp. Considering we are talking bout the ultimate example of pointlessly frivolous expenditure in all of human history (until the late 20th century), Assuming they were tombs, why bother? There is enough stone there to build a thousand temples of the sizes later dynasties would build. For one thing. That according to the mainstream view, served no pragmatic purpose. Plenty of turdies and ashes to collect elsewhere. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 5:56:37 PM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By exDefensorMilitas: The mistaken belief that people of ancient times thought the Earth was flat was started by Washington Irvin in his fancifully stylized story about Christopher Columbus. This story was mistakenly thought of as a serious work by some British and French scholars, and later pushed by Protestants and Atheists as a means to discredit the Catholic Church regarding science, in the 1800's. Anyone with a moderate education since the Ptolemy, in the 3rd Century B.C.E, was taught that Earth is sphere. As that properly explained the horizon, the difference in shadows between geographically separated locations and astronomical observations. With the apparent lack of an ability to fact check a blatant falsehood that is less then 300 years old, from a time period that we have extensive writings from; why should anyone here believe you have sussed out anything true, from a time period when the best evidence is literally fragments in a language sans context, that hasn't been spoken in thousands of years? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 6:01:19 PM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By waterglass: Well could you link me a vid that focuses of chemical residue. I wanna see what you watch. I like mystery channels and am always looking for new ones. like others, I wanna keep this thread going, so post em if you got em. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 6:13:46 PM EST
[Last Edit: headstoner]
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By brass: Have you been to Vegas in the past 25 years and saw the Luxor, and imagined two more half again as as big, that's the scale. Annotated SVG of Pyramids and structures Mouse over names to get an idea of scale. Today, pretty easy and they're getting taller. however long ago? A few Wonders of the world. If we still had the Library at Alexandria, we'd know all this and more. we also could be stuck in the stone age due to resting on laurels, but we'd know how they were built. Not to make light of a project of that magnitude it is very impressive for sure all of these ancient structures are, but to me so are modern structures. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 6:28:30 PM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By waterglass: It would also require a dedicated workforce to collect, transport and consume them making those things. A workforce that could be building instead of collecting. Considering we are talking bout the ultimate example of pointlessly frivolous expenditure in all of human history (until the late 20th century), Assuming they were tombs, why bother? There is enough stone there to build a thousand temples of the sizes later dynasties would build. For one thing. That according to the mainstream view, served no pragmatic purpose. Plenty of turdies and ashes to collect elsewhere. If they ran a tight enough ship and had dedicated jobs it may have gone pretty smooth. You have x amount of turd burglars, x amount of transporters, x amount of gantry operators, x amount of construction/mortar technicians and so on. I have no idea why they would build them that size if they are just tombs, but they seem awful complex so I would think they had other uses. Maybe that laser or maser or gayser beam thing has merit, they could have believed that making a giant lightning rod temple or super duper space beam portal would raise their dead bodies thus giving credence to the mummy curse shit we see in books and movies. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 6:48:16 PM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By waterglass:
So you blame him for believing falsehoods he was taught as a child written by a politicized mainstream academia while scolding him for not trusting politicized mainstream academia? Chuckles in Damn it Norman. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By waterglass:
Originally Posted By exDefensorMilitas:
Originally Posted By 6GUNZ:
Originally Posted By TxRabbitBane: No, that’s the way argument works... burden of proof on the outrageous claim. That’s you. So far there is still zero evidence presented that the GP wasn’t built by Khufu, and the Sphinx by khafre. So at this point, it’s just a story... may as well be Stargate. Generate power? For what? Using what mechanism (there is none, nor has there ever been evidence of such)? Conclusion: total fabrication. Why do bronze agers (or even more primitive folks) need a power plant? For their spaceships? The (debunked) “light bulbs”? Again, what chemicals, in what concentrations,, measured by whom? So far we have a plausible explanation (tomb/Khufu) and an outrageous one (antediluvian power plant with no power generating stuff, or whatever) with zero supporting evidence. Anyone with a moderate education since the Ptolemy, in the 3rd Century B.C.E, was taught that Earth is sphere. As that properly explained the horizon, the difference in shadows between geographically separated locations and astronomical observations. With the apparent lack of an ability to fact check a blatant falsehood that is less then 300 years old, from a time period that we have extensive writings from; why should anyone here believe you have sussed out anything true, from a time period when the best evidence is literally fragments in a language sans context, that hasn't been spoken in thousands of years? Chuckles in Damn it Norman. If one side is casting doubt on the veracity of thought processes and reasoning with available evidence, is it not intellectually honest to apply the same level of scrutiny to one's own understanding? That's what this thread always devolves too, who has a "truer" understanding of history. I just picked the lowest hanging fruit. Plank and splinter. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 6:56:12 PM EST
[Last Edit: a555]
[#32]
There's a discussion based on this (this was a boat pit where a boat had been buried, but I'm only calling into question if that was its initial purpose):
and this: 
Implies that there was a 35ft diameter cutting wheel used. Whatever motive force would run such a wheel and whatever speeds they could get it cooking seems like it could have a fair amount of inertia. |
|
|
WY, USA
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 7:05:40 PM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By tifosi:
The real mind trip is that the same exact masonry style is found all over Greece as well. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 7:29:13 PM EST
[Last Edit: a555]
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By FOX184: There is a lot of evidence that there was trade between what is now South America and what is now southern Europe and Africa thousands of years ago. This is reaching and I haven't thoroughly read through it, but it was a quick google search result that mentioned copper mining activities. (warning: article also talks about giants, caveat emptor): https://grahamhancock.com/dewhurstr1/ ETA: When researching and trying to separate fact from fiction, I thoroughly believe in not dismissing any theories immediately no matter how far-fetched they seem; this includes theories of giants, et cetera. There were giant bears, cats, pachyderms, lizards, et cetera and it seems plausible that giant primates may have existed as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 8:25:40 PM EST
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By waterglass:
It would also require a dedicated workforce to collect, transport and consume them making those things. A workforce that could be building instead of collecting. Considering we are talking bout the ultimate example of pointlessly frivolous expenditure in all of human history (until the late 20th century), Assuming they were tombs, why bother? There is enough stone there to build a thousand temples of the sizes later dynasties would build. For one thing. That according to the mainstream view, served no pragmatic purpose. Plenty of turdies and ashes to collect elsewhere. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By waterglass:
Originally Posted By Loremsk:
Originally Posted By waterglass:
That would probably require 40,000 gallons a clean water and 20,000-30,000 pounds of food per day. 150,000 pounds of fire wood per day. There should be a corresponding amount of shit somewhere. did they dig up 70 million pounds of fossilized turds? 10 million pounds of wood ash? millions of pounds of hand made pot fragments? If Not? Then they didn't find a camp that housed 20,000 people for 20 years. 365daysx20years=7,300 Average daily BM 8oz x 20,000=10,000pounds of daily shit 7300x10,000= 73,000,000 lets say 150,000 pounds of wood makes 5,000 pounds of ash. 7300daysx5000pounds of ash=36,500,000 then there is the clay pots required for water and cooking. Lets say the average water pot carried 3 gallons and the average pot cooked 3 pounds of food. water pots weighed 3 pounds and there would have been atleast 10,000 in circulation, along with similar number of cook pots of the same weight. 1 in one hundred were broken each day. so that is 600 pounds of broken pottery per day. 7300daysx600pounds of broken pottery 4,380,000. If they did not find 70 million pounds of human shit, 35 million pounds of wood ash and 4 million pounds of pot shards guess what else they didn't find? They didn't find a camp. Considering we are talking bout the ultimate example of pointlessly frivolous expenditure in all of human history (until the late 20th century), Assuming they were tombs, why bother? There is enough stone there to build a thousand temples of the sizes later dynasties would build. For one thing. That according to the mainstream view, served no pragmatic purpose. Plenty of turdies and ashes to collect elsewhere. No wonder "Aliens Did It" is such an easy answer to jump to.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 8:28:10 PM EST
[#36]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By headstoner:
Yeah, they are big but I wouldn't say that's extraordinarily impressive. The vegas comparison is nice at just over 100 feet vs the great pyramid at just under 150. Not to make light of a project of that magnitude it is very impressive for sure all of these ancient structures are, but to me so are modern structures. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By headstoner:
Originally Posted By brass: Have you been to Vegas in the past 25 years and saw the Luxor, and imagined two more half again as as big, that's the scale. Annotated SVG of Pyramids and structures Mouse over names to get an idea of scale. Today, pretty easy and they're getting taller. however long ago? A few Wonders of the world. If we still had the Library at Alexandria, we'd know all this and more. we also could be stuck in the stone age due to resting on laurels, but we'd know how they were built. Not to make light of a project of that magnitude it is very impressive for sure all of these ancient structures are, but to me so are modern structures. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 8:38:53 PM EST
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TxRabbitBane:
Inventing your own “faux history”? Looking at this thread, looks like a pretty common thing.... Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TxRabbitBane:
Originally Posted By Rossi:
Originally Posted By Balista:
I don't know if this was covered already but Stonehenge in the UK was recreated by archeologists in the 1950's. You are seeing a modern re-imagining of what they think it looked like. To me this like a Paul Bunyon roadside tourist trap. from 1901 to 1964, the majority of the stone circle was restored in a series of makeovers which have left it, in the words of one archaeologist, as ‘a product of the 20th-century heritage industry’. http://blog.english-heritage.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/al0921_063_01-Stone-57-being-re-erected-from-the-north-east-1958.jpg https://ashtronort.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/stonehenge-1958-repairs-0079.jpg?w=454&h=657 http://wafflesatnoon.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/stonehenge-splash.jpg https://www.ancient-code.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/stonehenge_14.jpg https://www.ancient-code.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/stonehenge_24.jpg https://www.ancient-code.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/stonehenge_32.jpg https://www.ancient-code.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/stonehenge_34.jpg Notice the concrete? https://www.themodernantiquarian.com/img_fullsize/66745.jpg Not much different than those "restaurateurs" that paint some stuff over an original relic using their own views. Looking at this thread, looks like a pretty common thing.... 2) also do not establish anything as definitive. The mainstream archaeology also has theories and is not uncommon that they publish new ones since the olders ones did not hold water or new evidence was found that disproved what they thought. 3) Furthermore, you did not come up with a counter argument disproving the numbers posted here. Just saying that "they are not correct because they go against mainstream" does very little to help your views and beliefs. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 8:41:33 PM EST
[Last Edit: TxRabbitBane]
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 6GUNZ:
There are lots of them. There is one that's floating around that's pretty good, but I can't remember the title. I don't know of any good ones that focus solely on the chemicals. There might be some, but if there are I don't know of them. In any alternative theories documentary though the powerplant theory is usually discussed, along with the experiment that Siemens performed on top of the Great Pyramid. There's this one engineer who has a pretty good explanation of how it could have worked, but I can't remember his name. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 6GUNZ:
Originally Posted By waterglass: Well could you link me a vid that focuses of chemical residue. I wanna see what you watch. I like mystery channels and am always looking for new ones. like others, I wanna keep this thread going, so post em if you got em. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 8:53:35 PM EST
[#39]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By a555: and this: http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/img/sv58cadff1.jpg Implies that there was a 35ft diameter cutting wheel used. Whatever motive force would run such a wheel and whatever speeds they could get it cooking seems like it could have a fair amount of inertia. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 8:58:10 PM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By brass: Those heights are meters, so they range from 150-500 ft tall-ish (Didn't bother with m-ft calc). Pretty huge when stuck that "close" together, prominence is much greater, as it's pretty flat and open around them. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 9:01:41 PM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By headstoner:
Well when I read that the Egyptians were around for 3000+ years I have to think they must have learned something. We have only been doing slightly more than clacking rocks together for far less than 1000 years with most major leaps in tech occuring just recently. I bet they were very proficient in their skills. 20 years sounds like a very long time to me. The biger arguments in my mind would be workforce, actual methods and techniques, and of course reason. For all I know they could have gotten one stone per day cut, delivered and placed; and for all I know they could have been doing that in a assembly line configuration spanning from quarry to placement...500+miles of huge stones with people to keep the chain moving at a pace of quarry to placement per day= how ever many stones were in that line from quarry to placement per day were getting the job done. I bet they weren't union workers. The stones I work with are typically 2000lbs or under, (some exceptions of course) with just me working and having the stones finished I could load and deliver 10-20 a day depending on distance( I'm imagining under 20 miles). With factory level equipment It wouldn't be unreasonable to cut and polish 10-20 a day. With a bunch of people a bunch of work could get done fairly quickly. I havent really tried to understand the sheer magnitude of the great pyramids, as far as number of stones, size and that sort of thing but I know I can do what I consider a lot of work in a reasonable amount of time without trying to set speed records. Its all different depending on what it is im doing, cutting I can do fast, polishing I could do a lot faster but I'm not a factory/ production type business, I just do it just because I can. It is a lot faster to order a stone from a large facility, but they have them ready to go, I can in theory cut, polish and engrave a stone from a single boulder in a few days if I wanted to work hard....but I dont like working hard. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By headstoner:
Originally Posted By Rossi: What are your thoughts about the processes and efficiency they "supposedly" used? My question is about the numbers and time. Mainstream archaeologists say they built the whole Great Pyramid in max 20 years dragging very large granite (up to 80 tons each) boulders from over 550 miles and smaller limestone ones (up to 15 tons) from quarries nearby (approx. 20 miles) and using around 20,000 people, with some saying it was no more than 6 or 7,000. There's one account from Herodotus (a Greek visiting them at the time) who mentioned 100,000 but the mainstream archaeologists dismiss this number saying it was just "hearsay". The numbers do not seem to match when we see much better documented numbers from China saying they used something between 500,000 to 1,500,000 people to build one section of their wall over 20 years. The Chinese did not use massive boulders. Instead, they used bricks and much smaller rocks. The numbers seem quite off, don't you think? I bet they were very proficient in their skills. 20 years sounds like a very long time to me. The biger arguments in my mind would be workforce, actual methods and techniques, and of course reason. For all I know they could have gotten one stone per day cut, delivered and placed; and for all I know they could have been doing that in a assembly line configuration spanning from quarry to placement...500+miles of huge stones with people to keep the chain moving at a pace of quarry to placement per day= how ever many stones were in that line from quarry to placement per day were getting the job done. I bet they weren't union workers. The stones I work with are typically 2000lbs or under, (some exceptions of course) with just me working and having the stones finished I could load and deliver 10-20 a day depending on distance( I'm imagining under 20 miles). With factory level equipment It wouldn't be unreasonable to cut and polish 10-20 a day. With a bunch of people a bunch of work could get done fairly quickly. I havent really tried to understand the sheer magnitude of the great pyramids, as far as number of stones, size and that sort of thing but I know I can do what I consider a lot of work in a reasonable amount of time without trying to set speed records. Its all different depending on what it is im doing, cutting I can do fast, polishing I could do a lot faster but I'm not a factory/ production type business, I just do it just because I can. It is a lot faster to order a stone from a large facility, but they have them ready to go, I can in theory cut, polish and engrave a stone from a single boulder in a few days if I wanted to work hard....but I dont like working hard. Just to give an idea of numbers: The Great Pyramid used an estimated 2,500,000 stones, between granite and limestone. Most was limestone. Granite (large up to 80 tons boulders) came from 550 miles away. Limestone (smaller up to 15 tons boulders) came from 20 miles away. As waterglass estimated, to complete the pyramid in 20 years they would have to assemble an average of one boulder each 2 minutes or so if working 10 hour days. (2,500,000 / 20 / 365 / 10 = 34/hour). So, cut, transport, lift and assemble one each 2 minutes, non-stop. By the way, the mainstream archaeologists say they cut those stones using bronze and copper saws and tools. No iron. One detail that we forget and one article I posted highlights, is that the ramp around the pyramid to allow them to take them up would require twice the volume of the pyramid. So, imagine almost three pyramids volume of rocks moved to build one pyramid. 
Drawing depicting it.  Attached FileAnother article posted before is theorizing that the Egyptians actually did not use solid limestone as originally thought. They mixed a type of concrete using limestone and other aggregates that would make transporting much easier and molding the blocks instead of cutting much faster and efficient. He elaborated this theory based on his findings that the pyramids' casement was too porous and did not mach the quarries' limestone found around. Thoughts? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 9:24:32 PM EST
[#42]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Rossi: Good points. Just to give an idea of numbers: The Great Pyramid used an estimated 2,500,000 stones, between granite and limestone. Most was limestone. Granite (large up to 80 tons boulders) came from 550 miles away. Limestone (smaller up to 15 tons boulders) came from 20 miles away. As waterglass estimated, to complete the pyramid in 20 years they would have to assemble an average of one boulder each 2 minutes or so if working 10 hour days. (2,500,000 / 20 / 365 / 10 = 34/hour). So, cut, transport, lift and assemble one each 2 minutes, non-stop. By the way, the mainstream archaeologists say they cut those stones using bronze and copper saws and tools. No iron. One detail that we forget and one article I posted highlights, is that the ramp around the pyramid to allow them to take them up would require twice the volume of the pyramid. So, imagine almost three pyramids volume of rocks moved to build one pyramid.
Drawing depicting it. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/36058/PyramidBlocks002_JPG-859374.JPG Another article posted before is theorizing that the Egyptians actually did not use solid limestone as originally thought. They mixed a type of concrete using limestone and other aggregates that would make transporting much easier and molding the blocks instead of cutting much faster and efficient. He elaborated this theory based on his findings that the pyramids' casement was too porous and did not mach the quarries' limestone found around. Thoughts? EDIT: I just read that they are believed to have been built in a span of around 85 years. Do we know they used ramps like in the pic? Maybe they had some other method. The bottom (if they had it perfectly timed and choreographed coming in from all sides) they could probably lay stones at a insane rate. After that I dont know what would be the fastest way, bury the first row and do the same thing again??? Magic, didn't they have staffs with powers like levitation and stuff? I've seen some movies... 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 9:26:51 PM EST
[Last Edit: waterglass]
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By headstoner:
Whoa!!! I wouldnt say tombs are pointless frivolous expenditures, but I may be a little bias on the subject. If they ran a tight enough ship and had dedicated jobs it may have gone pretty smooth. You have x amount of turd burglars, x amount of transporters, x amount of gantry operators, x amount of construction/mortar technicians and so on. I have no idea why they would build them that size if they are just tombs, but they seem awful complex so I would think they had other uses. Maybe that laser or maser or gayser beam thing has merit, they could have believed that making a giant lightning rod temple or super duper space beam portal would raise their dead bodies thus giving credence to the mummy curse shit we see in books and movies. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By headstoner:
Originally Posted By waterglass: It would also require a dedicated workforce to collect, transport and consume them making those things. A workforce that could be building instead of collecting. Considering we are talking bout the ultimate example of pointlessly frivolous expenditure in all of human history (until the late 20th century), Assuming they were tombs, why bother? There is enough stone there to build a thousand temples of the sizes later dynasties would build. For one thing. That according to the mainstream view, served no pragmatic purpose. Plenty of turdies and ashes to collect elsewhere. If they ran a tight enough ship and had dedicated jobs it may have gone pretty smooth. You have x amount of turd burglars, x amount of transporters, x amount of gantry operators, x amount of construction/mortar technicians and so on. I have no idea why they would build them that size if they are just tombs, but they seem awful complex so I would think they had other uses. Maybe that laser or maser or gayser beam thing has merit, they could have believed that making a giant lightning rod temple or super duper space beam portal would raise their dead bodies thus giving credence to the mummy curse shit we see in books and movies. it is just that the great pyramid covers 13 acres at the base and stands 480 feet tall. Khafre is 470feet tall with a similar sized base. Menkaure is 215 feet tall. an acre is 40,000 square feet. 13 acres is 520,000 square feet. It is covers a plot bigger than many grave yards. the cores were built of blocks of the average weight of 5 thousand pounds. The chambers are made of stones up to 80 tons. the casing stones of the great pyramids, now gone, weighed up to 30,000 pounds each, were fitted perfectly, the entire surface polished and smooth. the Great pyramid has a surface area of 1,500,000 (one million, five hundred thousand) square feet now, with the casing stones it would have been more. All of it was polished. It was flat. Casing stones Casing stone in the British Museum[18] At completion, the Great Pyramid was surfaced by white "casing stones"—slant-faced, but flat-topped, blocks of highly polished white limestone. These were carefully cut to what is approximately a face slope with a seked of 5 1/2palms to give the required dimensions. Visibly, all that remains is the underlying stepped core structure seen today. In AD 1303, a massive earthquake loosened many of the outer casing stones, which in 1356 were carted away by Bahri Sultan An-Nasir Nasir-ad-Din al-Hasan to build mosques and fortresses in nearby Cairo. Many more casing stones were removed from the great pyramids by Muhammad Ali Pasha in the early 19th century to build the upper portion of his Alabaster Mosque in Cairo, not far from Giza. These limestone casings can still be seen as parts of these structures. Later explorers reported massive piles of rubble at the base of the pyramids left over from the continuing collapse of the casing stones, which were subsequently cleared away during continuing excavations of the site. Nevertheless, a few of the casing stones from the lowest course can be seen to this day in situ around the base of the Great Pyramid, and display the same workmanship and precision that has been reported for centuries. Petrie also found a different orientation in the core and in the casing measuring 193 centimetres ± 25 centimetres. He suggested a redetermination of north was made after the construction of the core, but a mistake was made, and the casing was built with a different orientation.[4] Petrie related the precision of the casing stones as to being "equal to opticians' work of the present day, but on a scale of acres" and "to place such stones in exact contact would be careful work; but to do so with cement in the joints seems almost impossible".[19] It has been suggested it was the mortar (Petrie's "cement") that made this seemingly impossible task possible, providing a level bed, which enabled the masons to set the stones exactlyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pyramid_of_Giza I have read up on it some, no one knows what the mortar actually was. a quote on it here Interestingly, the outer mantle was composed of 144,000 casing stones, all of them highly polished and flat to an accuracy of 1/100th of an inch, about 100 inches thick and weighing approx. 15 tons each. As if this isn’t incredible enough, the cornerstone foundations of the pyramid have ball and socket construction capable of dealing with heat expansion and earthquakes. This technology has allowed the Great Pyramid of Giza to remain standing thousands of years after its construction. Something that still causes headaches among experts is the mortar used in the construction of the Great Pyramid: The mortar used is of an unknown origin (Yes, no explanation given). It has been analyzed and its chemical composition is known but it can’t be reproduced. It is stronger than the stone and still holding up today. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 9:37:20 PM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By waterglass: Oh, no I didn't mean it like that at all. it is just that the great pyramid covers 13 acres at the base and stands 480 feet tall. Khafre is 470feet tall with a similar sized base. Menkaure is 215 feet tall. an acre is 40,000 square feet. 13 acres is 520,000 square feet. It is covers a plot bigger than many grave yards. the cores were built of blocks of the average weight of 5 thousand pounds. The chambers are made of stones up to 80 tons. the casing stones of the great pyramids, now gone, weighed up to 30,000 pounds each, were fitted perfectly, the entire surface polished and smooth. the Great pyramid has a surface area of 1,500,000 (one million, five hundred thousand) square feet now, with the casing stones it would have been more. All of it was polished. It was flat. This doesn't mention it, but the "mortar" was harder than the limestone. 
I understood, I was just making light of the tombstone/headstone thing. I think we should be trying to convince more people to purchase them...i know a guy!!!. Its pretty wild to imagine the scope of such a project for sure, those are absolutely incredible structures. They may have known some weird shit that may be so simple it eludes us now, maybe it wasn't simple or was far beyond our grasp or comprehension. One thing we all know for sure is they piled up some big rocks...in a deliberate fassion and with purpose. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 9:57:03 PM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By headstoner:
I understood, I was just making light of the tombstone/headstone thing. I think we should be trying to convince more people to purchase them...i know a guy!!!. Its pretty wild to imagine the scope of such a project for sure, those are absolutely incredible structures. They may have known some weird shit that may be so simple it eludes us now, maybe it wasn't simple or was far beyond our grasp or comprehension. One thing we all know for sure is they piled up some big rocks...in a deliberate fassion and with purpose. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By headstoner:
Originally Posted By waterglass: Oh, no I didn't mean it like that at all. it is just that the great pyramid covers 13 acres at the base and stands 480 feet tall. Khafre is 470feet tall with a similar sized base. Menkaure is 215 feet tall. an acre is 40,000 square feet. 13 acres is 520,000 square feet. It is covers a plot bigger than many grave yards. the cores were built of blocks of the average weight of 5 thousand pounds. The chambers are made of stones up to 80 tons. the casing stones of the great pyramids, now gone, weighed up to 30,000 pounds each, were fitted perfectly, the entire surface polished and smooth. the Great pyramid has a surface area of 1,500,000 (one million, five hundred thousand) square feet now, with the casing stones it would have been more. All of it was polished. It was flat. This doesn't mention it, but the "mortar" was harder than the limestone.
I understood, I was just making light of the tombstone/headstone thing. I think we should be trying to convince more people to purchase them...i know a guy!!!. Its pretty wild to imagine the scope of such a project for sure, those are absolutely incredible structures. They may have known some weird shit that may be so simple it eludes us now, maybe it wasn't simple or was far beyond our grasp or comprehension. One thing we all know for sure is they piled up some big rocks...in a deliberate fassion and with purpose. Most people don't know this but the Egyptians didn't have shoulder harnesses for animals when they built these things. They just tied a loop of leather around a cows horns when they used them to plow or pull. A cows neck is weak. the wooden yoke wasn't even a thing yet. It wasn't until the leather shoulder harness came along that people were able to get the most out of animals. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 9:59:18 PM EST
[#46]
Slaves built it.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 10:34:34 PM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By headstoner: How does that imply a 35ft diameter cutting wheel? Am I missing something? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 10:51:21 PM EST
[Last Edit: TxRabbitBane]
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Rossi: Good points. Just to give an idea of numbers: The Great Pyramid used an estimated 2,500,000 stones, between granite and limestone. Most was limestone. Granite (large up to 80 tons boulders) came from 550 miles away. Limestone (smaller up to 15 tons boulders) came from 20 miles away. As waterglass estimated, to complete the pyramid in 20 years they would have to assemble an average of one boulder each 2 minutes or so if working 10 hour days. (2,500,000 / 20 / 365 / 10 = 34/hour). So, cut, transport, lift and assemble one each 2 minutes, non-stop. By the way, the mainstream archaeologists say they cut those stones using bronze and copper saws and tools. No iron. One detail that we forget and one article I posted highlights, is that the ramp around the pyramid to allow them to take them up would require twice the volume of the pyramid. So, imagine almost three pyramids volume of rocks moved to build one pyramid.
Drawing depicting it. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/36058/PyramidBlocks002_JPG-859374.JPG Another article posted before is theorizing that the Egyptians actually did not use solid limestone as originally thought. They mixed a type of concrete using limestone and other aggregates that would make transporting much easier and molding the blocks instead of cutting much faster and efficient. He elaborated this theory based on his findings that the pyramids' casement was too porous and did not mach the quarries' limestone found around. Thoughts? Found it |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2019 11:32:02 PM EST
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HEATSEAKER:
You can figure out the size of the rotary blade that was used to cut something by the curvature of the saw marks but I'm not seeing any saw marks in that photo. Do we even know that it was cut and not split? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HEATSEAKER:
Originally Posted By headstoner: How does that imply a 35ft diameter cutting wheel? Am I missing something? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2019 1:04:41 AM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By headstoner:
Those numbers are staggering, one every 2 minutes sounds pretty crazy. EDIT: I just read that they are believed to have been built in a span of around 85 years. Do we know they used ramps like in the pic? Maybe they had some other method. The bottom (if they had it perfectly timed and choreographed coming in from all sides) they could probably lay stones at a insane rate. After that I dont know what would be the fastest way, bury the first row and do the same thing again??? Magic, didn't they have staffs with powers like levitation and stuff? I've seen some movies... Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By headstoner:
Originally Posted By Rossi: Good points. Just to give an idea of numbers: The Great Pyramid used an estimated 2,500,000 stones, between granite and limestone. Most was limestone. Granite (large up to 80 tons boulders) came from 550 miles away. Limestone (smaller up to 15 tons boulders) came from 20 miles away. As waterglass estimated, to complete the pyramid in 20 years they would have to assemble an average of one boulder each 2 minutes or so if working 10 hour days. (2,500,000 / 20 / 365 / 10 = 34/hour). So, cut, transport, lift and assemble one each 2 minutes, non-stop. By the way, the mainstream archaeologists say they cut those stones using bronze and copper saws and tools. No iron. One detail that we forget and one article I posted highlights, is that the ramp around the pyramid to allow them to take them up would require twice the volume of the pyramid. So, imagine almost three pyramids volume of rocks moved to build one pyramid.
Drawing depicting it. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/36058/PyramidBlocks002_JPG-859374.JPG Another article posted before is theorizing that the Egyptians actually did not use solid limestone as originally thought. They mixed a type of concrete using limestone and other aggregates that would make transporting much easier and molding the blocks instead of cutting much faster and efficient. He elaborated this theory based on his findings that the pyramids' casement was too porous and did not mach the quarries' limestone found around. Thoughts? EDIT: I just read that they are believed to have been built in a span of around 85 years. Do we know they used ramps like in the pic? Maybe they had some other method. The bottom (if they had it perfectly timed and choreographed coming in from all sides) they could probably lay stones at a insane rate. After that I dont know what would be the fastest way, bury the first row and do the same thing again??? Magic, didn't they have staffs with powers like levitation and stuff? I've seen some movies... As far the lifting process. The one showed in that picture is the commonly accepted by the mainstream folks. There are some new guys saying that they probably used "water elevators". I recall seeing an article about it a while ago. I'll try to find it and post here. The 85 years is interesting. Please post the article here so we can take a look. 85 years makes more sense in terms of the project duration. However, it opens a new can of worms. 1) considering the lifespan of that period, that would mean they started the construction way before the pharaohs were born or finished after they died. 2) it also brings up that because of the required time, they would have built more than one pyramid at a time Or, as many of us believe here, the Egyptians found the pyramids' "core" (the granite part) already there and remodeled them by adding the casing and using them as tombs. It's still a great feat but more doable than building the whole thing from scratch. Unless, of course, they had some very advanced technology that wasn't documented anywhere or was lost. The Alexandria library' fire by the Romans as a case. Nonetheless, it's still a big mystery either way. |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
